Talk:Norman Ireland
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Ireland on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page. | |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
|
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the priority scale. | |
 |
Norman Ireland is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
|
WikiProject Middle Ages To do:
|
|||
Contents |
[edit] More work
I think the main page needs a little more work, it needs a lot more grammatical finesse but more importantly correction of some facts which seem to be dubious (such as the names of the Irish and English families which, I think, are inaccurate) --134.225.163.117 12:29, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Name change
Can I request that htis page be re-named "Medieval Ireland", "Anglo-Norman Ireland" or "The Lordship of Ireland"? The invaders would only have identified themselves as Normans in the early centuries of their presence and the decisive link was to the Kndom of England, not Normandy. Also, many modern medieval historians object to the use of the term Norman in thsi context, because the people in question came from England, Wales Flanders, and elsewhere as well as France. Moreover, the common settlers were predominantly English. Jdorney 15:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
- Sure, i would say do it, i would put my support forward to Medieval Ireland. --Boothy443 | trácht ar 05:42, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
- Support . There is already an Early medieval and Viking era in the main article, so how about Late Medieval and Norman era or just Late Medieval Ireland? --Red King 18:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Hiberno-Norman Ireland
OK, I've finally got myself a nick as suggested by Red King to me last August when I brought this up. And this is (much!)longer than I had anticipated. I would be opposed to calling it "Anglo-Norman Ireland" as it is ahistorical for reasons which should be self-evident, and which start with the fact that the vast majority of Norman mercenaries, and their leaders, were recruited from Wales- i.e. they were Cambro-Normans- not England. It was Hiberno-Norman Ireland and to ignore the unique cultural and political world which the Normans created here by calling it 'Anglo-Norman Ireland' is historically unsustainable.
Even the transfer of Norman administrative systems from England such as the legal system, following the loss of Calais, in the early 13th century had radically different outcomes (e.g. Black Rent, Marsh Law and right up until the latter part of the sixteenth century the official, Privy Council-sanctioned use of Brehon law within the Pale when appropriate) due to the vastly different context of Norman settlement here. And if, as Robin Frame argues (Colonial Ireland 1169-1369), law defined identity in Norman Ireland the development of the legal system in Ireland demonstrates how "un-anglo" those of descent from the Norman invasion actually were.
Mac Lysaght makes a valuable distinction in this regard between "Anglo-Norman" surnames and "Hiberno-Norman" surnames as this divide reflects the split within the settlers, a split which existed right into the 16th century. As a title I think 'Norman-Ireland' is very fine, as it avoids the differences within the Norman community such as those between, say, the Fitzgeralds of Desmond and, say, the Barnwells of Turvey (Dublin). The article itself can delve into those differences. Medieval Ireland is fine, too, except that we would have to include the works of Katharine Simms, Nichols, Ó Corráin and numerous other writers then- i.e. We'd fundamentally change the subject from Norman Ireland to Gaelic and Norman Ireland. Maybe we can just have an article called 'Norman Ireland' and another for 'Gaelic Ireland' and a section in each article covering the fluidity between both worlds?
There was enormous fluidity in identity in Late Medieval Ireland so we have to be careful not to straightjacket it by epithets like "Anglo-Normans" for a very diverse community. Gaelic Ireland cannot be excluded from an article on Medieval Ireland. In addition, while it is true that the invaders identified with the Kingdom of England, it was the kingdom of Norman England and moreover, when the Norman invasion happened, England was the secondary kingdom.
Interestingly, Wikipedia's article on The Normans in England states '...Normans began to identify themselves as Anglo-Norman; indeed, the Anglo-Norman language was considerably distinct from the "Parisian French", which was the subject of some humour by Geoffrey Chaucer. Eventually, even this distinction largely disappeared in the course of the Hundred Years war, with the Anglo-Norman aristocracy increasingly identifying themselves as English, and the Anglo-Norman and Anglo-Saxon languages merging to form Middle English.' The Hundred Years war ended in 1453, which is roughly eighty years before the end of medieval Ireland/feudalism/fall of Kildare (OK, that's another point but let's leave it for the moment!). So, if the Normans in England were not even describing themselves as "Anglo-Norman" until such a late period surely this makes such an epithet for the Normans in Ireland redundant, even if we accept that the Normans who were closely aligned to government in the Pale would have perceived themselves to have a type of Anglo-Norman culture (the reality and this perception were of course vastly different- yet another article!).
Finally, I would contest the claim that the most common settlers were from England. One of Ireland's most common names is still Walsh/Breathnach, a surname which is of course Welsh and which came in with the Norman invasion. Where is the evidence that the most famous Norman surnames of all, the clearly Norman Burke/ de Búrca, Barry/ de Barra, Brown/ de Brún, Fitzgerald/Mac Gearailt and others came from England, as opposed to Wales where the leadership of the invasion most definitely came from? On the aptly named 'Cambro-Norman invasion of Ireland' page- http://www.rootsweb.com/~irlkik/ihm/invasion.htm - there is a list of the surnames of the recorded invaders, and those who claimed to have been present. That list also provides information on the known whereabouts of many of those families prior to the invasion with a list of 'Pembrokeshire families' 'Devonshire families' etc etc.
I like the suggestion of 'Late Medieval and Norman Ireland' for its precision *but* "Late Medieval" includes Gaelic Ireland so its precision is apparent rather than real. 'Late Medieval Norman Ireland' is precise- but a tad unwieldy? 'Norman Ireland' is concise and accurate, and leaves room for expansion on the divisions between gaelicised ("King's English enemies") and loyal ("King's loyal lieges")residents who were descended from the Norman invasion. 'Hiberno-Norman Ireland' is a little longer, but even more precise as all those of descent from the Norman invasion were Hiberno-Normans (Mac Lysaght's distinction was shorthand for gaelicised and loyal settlers, but even the latter couldn't deny they were different from the English- no more than loyalists today would be deemed to be uninfluenced by their presence in Ireland regardless of their possible protestations). According to the available records, not even a majority of those of the same descent were of Anglo-Norman descent. The invasion was primarily a Cambro-Norman invasion, with some help from the Normans in England and the continent, but *all* of the descendants were Hiberno-Normans.
- How long should it get on the talk page? I agree with the points made. Cambro-Norman is the term used by David Greene, and I think it is accurate - the links between Waterford, Pembroke and Devon remained strong for centuries, and were vital in the Tudor reconquest of the country. The events of 1169 don't constitute an invasion, and the actual conquest came about through the subsequent unilateral constitutional settlement, when Henry II was invited to join the party. From Sicily to Syria, the Normans were expert at charging in and kicking crap out of everyone, and then holding their hands up before marrying the bosses' daughters. The original conquest has been addressed repeatedly in Irish courts over the last hundred years - mostly over title to fishing rights on rivers (Magna Charta etc) - with the conclusion that the conquest was territorially thorough (certain parts excluded, but not south Donegal). In my view, that's nonsense, but the protection of property rights demands elaborate fibs, and Norman involvement in Ireland was all about establishing estates. Keep the title as it is, but elaborate the continental involvement eg. the Desmond claim to descent from the northern Italian Normans - Europe is not outer Mongolia, and Britain is not the centre of the Universe.--shtove 01:17, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
_________________ This article is supposed to be about the history of Ireland, from about 1171-1536, not only the colonial community. It is not supposed to exclude the Gaelic Irish. So how about "Later medievel Ireland"? If this needs to be expanded furhter to be acceptable, so be it. It looks like user:El Gringo has volunteered to do it! Jdorney 12:34, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Also, another central point. While I accept the point that many of the "normans" had pretty tenous English roots, Ireland was still made a lordship of the King of England in this period, which in the long term was the most important development. Jdorney
[edit] Normans in Ireland vs Angevins in Ireland
Who would like to bet that Ireland was conquered by the Normans instead of the Angevins? What, is a county not so impressive as a duchy? Or, is this a desperate attempt to make a widespread Norman identity? (See Angevin Empire) IP Address 11:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
- It was conquered under the Angevin Empire by mostly Norman nobles (Norman from Normandy, or England, or Wales). The Angevin and Aquitanian nobility did not devellop well in the British isles as they had little interest in leaving their rich homelands. Norman Ireland does not seem to be an abusive title to me.Matthieu 07:07, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Who's who?
"Firstly, numerous rebellious attacks were launched by Gaelic lords upon the English lordships, which at best stretched their resources and at worst regained territory from them. "
I don't get this. Who's resources are stretched, and why is that good, and who's worst is regaining territory? Masked marsoe 10:45, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
The line means that the English came under attack. Arising out of this, in the best case scenario for them this stretched their resources but thy held off teh attacks, in the worst case scenario for them, they lost territory to the Gaelic Irish.
Jdorney 11:24, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
